Corrupt Politicians and Ungodly Health Officials ‘The Pukes’ Have Taken Control of Our Lives, Hell on Earth a.k.a Tribulation

HNewsWire-The wicked are described as those who “slay the widow and the stranger and murder the orphans” (Psa 94:6), who “deprive the needy of justice and rob the poor of My people of their rights, so that widows may be their spoil and that they may plunder the orphans” (Isa 10:2). In addition, “They are fat, they are sleek, they also excel in deeds of wickedness; they do not plead the cause, the cause of the orphan, that they may prosper; and they do not defend the rights of the poor” (Jer 5:28).

At a briefing Monday in Geneva, a top World Health Organization official said the spread of the coronavirus that causes COVID-19 from individuals who aren’t showing symptoms of illness is now considered “very rare.”

The World Is In Big Trouble, for Those That Believe We Will Go Back to Some Sense of Normal Life Here on Earth, You Will Be Sadly Disappointed, Seven and Half Years of Hell on Earth Which Began January 1, 2020

“Our courts oppose the righteous, and justice is nowhere to be found. Truth stumbles in the streets, and honesty has been outlawed” (Isa. 59:14, NLT)…We Turned Our Backs On GOD, Now We Have Been Left To Our Own Devices, Enjoy…

While Mainstream Media Continues to Push a False Narrative, Big Tech Has Keep the Truth From Coming out by Shadow Banning Conservatives, Christians, and Like-Minded People, Those Death Attributed to the Coronavirus Is a Result of Those Mentioned, They Truly Are Evil…

It is normal for individuals to be persuaded to murder perfect strangers who have done nothing to harm them. Individuals may be persuaded to think that those who are properly categorized are entitled to no human rights. It is possible for even the most brilliant individuals to be swayed into accepting that the mere ownership of a different perspective is bad and the voicing of dissent is a crime if the stakes are so high as to be life and death. Children and innocent citizens alike may be executed with military weaponry as long as they are branded "collateral damage" by the military. All of this requires is that "the adversary" be labeled as bad.

The Opioid Crisis: Imminent vs. Immediate

Just as strange as it seems, the exact same two phrases utilized by the Berry Obama legal team to reverse the presumption of innocence to a presumption of guilt for terrorism suspects situated overseas proven to be lethal in a completely different context throughout the twenty-first century.

Even if many factors have contributed to a fast and startling rise in drug abuse and overdose fatalities throughout the United States, a tidal wave of diversion was made feasible by drug-dealer physicians and the renowned "pain clinics" where they operated. As the number of people dependent on narcotics grew, manufacturers and pharmacies alike created and dispersed billions of tablets to meet the rising demand.

It is widely accepted that Purdue Pharma and the UN-godly Sackler family are the driving force behind the opioid crisis, having successfully convinced doctors that their patented time-release prescription narcotic, Oxycontin, was nonaddictive and could be safely administered to patients even for moderate pain. Because of the influence of top FDA (Food and Drug Administration) officials, the medicine was authorized and allowed to be marketed with a package insert fraudulently claiming that it was less likely to be misused than other opioid medications; hence, this marketing achievement was accomplished by influence.

In the two decades after Oxycontin's 1996 introduction, the pharmaceutical business frequently shifted to neologizing in dangerous ways in its attempt to sell as many tablets as possible. Marketers and sales reps said that patients experiencing breakthrough pain needed to have their doses doubled when it was discovered that the tablets occasionally wore off before the twelve-hour time release period. Patients who looked to be hooked to their painkillers were really suffering from pseudo-addiction, according to narcotics marketers, and the cure for that was (surprise!) even larger dosages of their medications. Even though these arguments seem absurd in hindsight, many doctors appear to have been persuaded to believe that their patients' miserable conditions were not indicative of addiction but rather a manifestation of their ongoing and unbearable pain, the solution to which was to ply them with even more powerful narcotics.

Legislators were warned of the growing issue of drug abuse, but they ignored the warnings and failed to demand that the FDA stop working with Purdue to promote their absurd pro-narcotics marketing effort. Many other corporations also had a role in expanding the market for these drugs, which had previously only been available to the terminally sick, by spreading the "pain pandemic" mythology. Johnson & Johnson was a contributing factor in the opioid epidemic by producing tons of poppies (in Tasmania) to supply the industry's tremendous need for raw opium, without which the billions of tablets prescribed would not have been possible.

Cardinal Health, McKesson, and Amerisource Bergen were targeted by the DEA for issuing "Immediate Suspended Orders" (ISOs) against pharmacies, as the opioid epidemic became more widely publicized. Joe Rannazzisi, the deputy director of the Office of Diversion Control, hoped to stop the ongoing mass shipments of opioids to retailers such as CVS in cases where the sheer volume of prescriptions could not be explained by ordinary medical practice and so was a clear indication that widespread diversion of narcotics was underway by issuing such orders.

The Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act (HR4709) was crafted by a team of corporate attorneys and lobbyists who succeeded to put together a new legislation in 2014 that, despite its benevolent-sounding name, sought to protect, above all, drug makers and distributors. Redefining "imminent danger" to imply "a high risk of an immediate threat" was done by the Act, which modified the statute already in place. When Linden Barber, a former DEA officer and lawyer who now represents drug distributors, testified before Congress, he argued that "having a clear legal standard is always preferable," he was one of the Act's strongest proponents. The bill was approved without a vote since it seemed like a policy that no reasonable person could oppose. The Act, on the other hand, greatly limited the DEA's capacity to issue ISOs since it was impossible for officials to fulfill the newly established legal criterion of imminence as needing immediacy.

The Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2014 was signed into law by President Berry Obama, and the marketing effort to encourage the use of highly addictive time-release drugs continued apace. Forcing the DEA to prevent the shipping of tons of drugs meant that the number of addicts would continue to rise as strong prescription medications were diverted for recreational use and created more of them. A larger number of drug users also meant a greater risk for accidental overdoses since fentanyl was sometimes mixed in with opiate-based heroin sold on the street.

Despite the high death tolls, which had already reached tens of thousands by 2014, the pharmaceutical companies claimed that the plight of addicts was no reason to deny aid to others who were really suffering, and who would be mistreated if restrictions were placed on their access to drugs. There was enough evidence that many of the overdose victims started out as genuine pain sufferers, and only realized that they had a problem after they reached the bottom of their amber vials.
The EVIL of Obamacare on the Opioid Crisis.

Twenty-first century "everything changed," not just because of war on terror, rebranding of torture, and assassination becoming commonplace, but also because of President Obama's pharmaceutical-friendly approach to healthcare. Obamacare, the president's centerpiece piece of legislation that leftists feared would usher in socialized medicine, was really a concession to the pharmaceutical and insurance industries, spreading the kind of crony corporate assistance that had previously only been available to the military.

He helped pharmaceutical and insurance business executives negotiate favorable pricing agreements so that their profits could be maximized, while at the same time significantly boosting the sales volume of their products. The pharmaceutical business benefited immensely from government programs like Medicaid and Medicare, which provided almost infinite free mental meds to low-income patients, as well as the VA, which provided prescriptions to veterans (Veterans Administration). SSRI (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor) and anti-anxiety sales, as well as sales of atypical anti-psychotic drugs and other psychotropes, such as opioids, have all grown in tandem with the rise in mental health disability claims. Due to mandatory Obamacare enrollment and steep tax penalties for those who refused, millions of formerly uninsured Americans have had their prescription drug costs covered by the middle class.

Although Obama may have meant to make healthcare accessible to the uninsured, Obamacare eventually rendered medical treatment in the United States excessively costly for many middle-class families, who saw their co - pays, premiums, and deductibles climb drastically. Obamacare. Medical sector executives' wages have surged, but pharmaceuticals and procedures have increased too, as a result of the new, legally mandated healthcare scheme. The United States has seen a dramatic increase in the number of persons filing medical bankruptcy in recent years. When prescription narcotics users lost their jobs and their insurance coverage, they had little choice but to resort to the streets to get the drugs they needed since they couldn't afford to pay out of pocket for such pricey prescription medications.

It's hardly surprising given the ObamaCare tale that the administration's $1.1 billion for opioid crisis relief was mostly used to treat those who were already addicted to opioids. More and more medicines (like as Suboxone) are being sold to addicts in order to help them wean themselves off of their substances. When it came to the opioid problem, Obama's sluggishness and proclivity for pill-popping led to an increase in the number of individuals who needed to use additional pharmaceuticals to break their narcotics habit, essentially exchanging one drug for another. As a result of both Obamacare facilitation of previously uninsured people's easy access to narcotics and the administration's reaction to the overdose crisis, the pharmaceutical industry's earnings increased as a result of the issue of opioid over-prescription.
Death and Its Relationship

There may be no additional connection between drone killing and opiate abuse, but Obama's former attorney general Eric Holder (2009-2015), who represented Purdue Pharma in a 2004 lawsuit claiming fraudulent marketing of Oxycontin was a former legal consultant to the corporation. Eric Holder defended the essential linguistic technique used to justify and promote Obama's drone death spree, the creative interpretation of imminence as not indicating immediacy, in a notorious White Paper and several public appearances.

The Obama administration's normalization of assassination broadened the definition of what constitutes "legal state killing" by shifting the burden of evidence from victims to perpetrators and asserting that "areas beyond current conflicts" were in reality war zones. It was possible for corporations involved in the startlingly profitable industry of state-inflicted murder to create a genuine death machine with all of these language tactics working together. As many persons labeled as "terrorist suspects" as possible allowed not just weapons makers but also logistics and analytics firms to earn handsomely from their efforts.

Despite the nationwide opioid overdose problem, legal teams for pharmaceutical companies worked with politicians in 2014 to flip the urgent vs. immediate dichotomy and repurpose it in their favor, allowing the promiscuous distribution of opioids to continue. Drug companies' profits were "ensured" by the Ensuring Patient Access and Effective Drug Enforcement Act of 2014, but millions of new addicts would be created during the second decade of this century, accelerating and multiplying a domino effect of diversion and overdoses that was already ravaging communities across the United States. It doesn't matter if the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies wanted to sell drugs rather than kill people. With little concern for the long-term implications, they relentlessly promoted opioids. In fact, they continued to market drugs despite a record number of overdose fatalities.

More than 2,000 suspected terrorists were deliberately and premeditated killed by missiles fired from drones under the Obama administration. As of April 2021, more than 100,000 people in the United States have died from an opioid overdose. Many other countries have followed suit in procuring killer drones for their own purposes, convinced by the precedent established by the U.S. government that state-inflicted killing is completely legitimate. The long-term ramifications, however, are likely to be more fatal than the opioid epidemic. Instead of emulating American physicians' overzealous opioid prescribing habits, the pharmaceutical firms in the UK and Europe have maintained their questionable marketing techniques, even in nations with less established health care systems.

Government organizations like the Pentagon and the Food and Drug Administration, which have been enslaved by industrial interests that prioritize profits above all else, will simply turn the other way as the bodies pile up, rejecting responsibility for any and all "collateral damage." Bureaucrats and business executives prefer to avoid accountability for the repercussions of their decisions, which explains why lobbyists from the military as well as the pharmaceutical sector can easily influence legislators. Given that recent measures by government "experts" have increased the number of fatalities, rather than avoided them, the restriction of language by these "experts" helps to underline the dangers of censorship by government officials themselves.

Those elected to represent the people are bound to act in the best interests of their constituents. A regime that places the interests of its business executives ahead of the lives of its citizens? Evil Man Has Run The Last Race Towards Hell